I'm not going to do the comprehensive review coverage others do with their threads. I just want to make people aware of the good reviews and provide a place for discussion.

Here are a few excerpts that caught my eye:

"A glorious sum of newly implemented RPG systems, refined traditional series beats and boasting one of the most entertaining stories in recent memory, Assassin's Creed Odyssey is simply the best in the series and one of the finest open-world adventures available." - PSU (95)

"While there are definite rough edges, Odyssey sets a new bar for Assassin’s Creed games and holds its own in the eternal debate over the best open-world roleplaying games ever." - IGN (92)

"Assassin’s Creed Odyssey aims high in its attempts to blend innovative additions with returning features. The execution might be uneven, but Ubisoft Quebec ultimately strikes a successful balance among the many parts. The story is compelling, both as a hero’s journey and in the way it ties into the series’ wider lore. Exploring the world is fun, combat is empowering, and getting epic loot is a thrill. That solid core formula carries Odyssey a long way, but like Icarus and his wax wings, it’s not enough to reach the bright star on the horizon." (Game Informer, 83)

"Assassin's Creed Odyssey is far from perfect, as the combat feels clunky, the voice acting is all over the place and the late game level requirements feels really restricting, but despite all that it's hard not to adore the overall experience. The scope and feel of the world are simply amazing – the depiction of Greece is extremely beautiful – and thanks to the stellar exploration mode and the varied array of activities, it's also way more fun to explore than before." (Gamer.no, 80)

Member

Its not really hand holding. Can you imagine if something like Skyrim had no markers and you had a quest were it said to go to 'X cave', you could literally spend days looking for it.
We never used to have open world games with this complexity and size in the old days.

Member

Its not really hand holding. Can you imagine if something like Skyrim had no markers and you had a quest were it said to go to 'X cave', you could literally spend days looking for it.
We never used to have open world games with this complexity and size in the old days.

Member

But Morrowind had basic graphics and a very basic open world. In todays games, it can be hard finding something thats 20 feet in front of you due to the complicated level design and trees and bushes and all that stuff. Plus gsmes today have FAR more content than past games, no need for extending the life of games anymore by giving us no quest markers, or super hard difficulty etc.

Member

Nice to see its turning out well enough with people. ACG has a pretty good review, I'm surprised at the length of the game. I mean I'm like 60 hrs into DQ XI and this is ready to go and I'm hoping to beat it before RDR2 comes out, but I'm not so sure haha. I like to do side content and it seems this actually has more than Origins so that's a relief for me. Man so many good games out right now, I also want to go through VC4, play some Warriors Orochi 4, and replay The Evil Within 2. Then friends will want to squad up in Blackout...

I'm looking forward to a better story in this than Origins too, and ACG said the ending was good so there's that.

Member

But Morrowind had basic graphics and a very basic open world. In todays games, it can be hard finding something thats 20 feet in front of you due to the complicated level design and trees and bushes and all that stuff. Plus gsmes today have FAR more content than past games, no need for extending the life of games anymore by giving us no quest markers, or super hard difficulty etc.

Member

I'm surprised by the review scores. Origins, by comparison, was 81, so this is scoring higher, which is the opposite of what I expected. I figured the fact that it shares a lot in common with Origins would give reviewers a "ho hum, been there, done that" feeling, but apparently the additions to the game (RPG mechanics, dialog choices, explorer mode) make a positive difference.

I'm impressed that they were able to pull it off. I remember some people saying Ubi shouldn't venture into this territory (RPGs) because they had no experience. Seems like they did well.

I'm currently running through Far Cry: Primal, so I'll probably take a break from Ubisoft games before tackling this one, but it looks like it'll be a good experience, once I get around to it.

Agree. Morrowind was very complex. Great game. The addition of "explorer" mode here is one of the things that's selling me on the game, because it reminds me of how immersive that experience was. It's an entirely different feeling, exploring and discovering a location, vs. having your nose pointed to exactly where you should go.

I've heard that they give you indications of the general location in dialog. Then as you approach the area, you can use your eagle sight to pinpoint the specific person or location. It shouldn't be all that hard.

I'm sure it'll be simpler than some of the directions you got in Morrowind. Some of those were like, "Find two big rocks shaped like an L, south of the mountain in region X, then find Rirrzh in a cave to the northeast."

Member

I've heard that they give you indications of the general location in dialog. Then as you approach the area, you can use your eagle sight to pinpoint the specific person or location. It shouldn't be all that hard.

I'm sure it'll be simpler than some of the directions you got in Morrowind. Some of those were like, "Find two big rocks shaped like an L, south of the mountain in region X, then find Rirrzh in a cave to the northeast."

Was it? I thought it was a new addition. That's how they've talked about it, anyhow.

Member

I'm surprised by the review scores. Origins, by comparison, was 81, so this is scoring higher, which is the opposite of what I expected. I figured the fact that it shares a lot in common with Origins would give reviewers a "ho hum, been there, done that" feeling, but apparently the additions to the game (RPG mechanics, dialog choices, explorer mode) make a positive difference.

I'm impressed that they were able to pull it off. I remember some people saying Ubi shouldn't venture into this territory (RPGs) because they had no experience. Seems like they did well.

I'm currently running through Far Cry: Primal, so I'll probably take a break from Ubisoft games before tackling this one, but it looks like it'll be a good experience, once I get around to it.

Agree. Morrowind was very complex. Great game. The addition of "explorer" mode here is one of the things that's selling me on the game, because it reminds me of how immersive that experience was. It's an entirely different feeling, exploring and discovering a location, vs. having your nose pointed to exactly where you should go.

Member

Its not really hand holding. Can you imagine if something like Skyrim had no markers and you had a quest were it said to go to 'X cave', you could literally spend days looking for it.
We never used to have open world games with this complexity and size in the old days.

The key question is whether they did a good job designing the game to be played without quest markers. I'm hoping they did, because I'm going to give it a go.

Last year, one of my favorite experiences in Breath of the Wild was when the Old Man sends you on your way to finally leave the Great Plateau, he gives you directions to find Impa in Kakariko. He's really explicit. "Go west through that split mountain in the distance, then you'll come to a little settlement with horses. Then go north until you reach a cliff, follow the cliff west until you can go north again and go north." I followed his directions and sure enough reached Kakariko with no trouble.

I was pretty disappointed when I eventually realized that the only reason I didn't have a quest marker telling me exactly where to go was because I must have accidentally turned it off in the menu early on. I mean it's cool that BotW basically just turns you loose to find your own way, but I'm talking about actually having to follow the realistic navigation directions given to you by an NPC, looking for specific landmarks and shit. I love that, it's been a lost art for a very, very long time. Too long.

Member

The key question is whether they did a good job designing the game to be played without quest markers. I'm hoping they did, because I'm going to give it a go.

Last year, one of my favorite experiences in Breath of the Wild was when the Old Man sends you on your way to finally leave the Great Plateau, he gives you directions to find Impa in Kakariko. He's really explicit. "Go west through that split mountain in the distance, then you'll come to a little settlement with horses. Then go north until you reach a cliff, follow the cliff west until you can go north again and go north." I followed his directions and sure enough reached Kakariko with no trouble.

I was pretty disappointed when I eventually realized that the only reason I didn't have a quest marker telling me exactly where to go was because I must have accidentally turned it off in the menu early on. I mean it's cool that BotW basically just turns you loose to find your own way, but I'm talking about actually having to follow the realistic navigation directions given to you by an NPC, looking for specific landmarks and shit. I love that, it's been a lost art for a very, very long time. Too long.

I'll be looking forward to hearing impressions on that, too. I don't think the "explorer mode" will be as involved as you're hoping for -- with directions as complex as the ones you're describing. I think that would be too much work for the quest designers, to ensure that every quest was navigable by those sorts of directions, given via dialog.

That's one reason that developers haven't done this in 20 years -- it's a lot of work. It's not just that gamers are stupid and spoiled by handholding. It's that designing quests where an arrow points to the objective is a lot easier and simpler than describing locations via dialog and having a way to record and access those instructions in-game. It's more work that way -- which is one reason I'm impressed that they went to the trouble.

I'm guessing that it'll be a relatively limited "explorer mode" where you'll get a couple bits of information from the quest-giver about the person and general location, which will give you enough of a sense of at least what city or area to look in. Then, when you get close enough, you pull out your eagle, and you scan for the person you're looking for.

That's just my guess, though. Should be interesting to see.

I also hope they give you plenty of options to turn on and off parts of the HUD. I love that about modern games. It makes it so much more immersive, to turn most of those HUD elements off.

Member

I liked Origins, but by the end of it I was super burnt out by the game. Odyssey looks great, and the changes to combat sound interesting, but I'm just afraid that I'll get bored even quicker. Positives reviews and impressions all around, maybe I should get this at a later date along with all the other DLC's.

Neo Member

I haven't played an Assassin's Creed since Black Flag and even then, I didn't play it very much. The last one I played a lot of was AC3. I'm interested in getting this but I'm honestly not sure what these games are like now, story and gameplay wise I mean. The reviews for Origins and this one are looking good though!

Both characters were individually mocaped, and you can see the differences in their performances in the game. Because of this, many reviewers and early players preferred Kassandra as her voice acting and motions more consistently felt right for the scenes. Having said that, Alexios is apparently quite good as well, so you can't go wrong with who you pick.